Cited by 0Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderNeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical InnovationsNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Effects of stimulant medication on neuropsychological functioning in college students without ADHD.

Open access
Vasko, John M., Looby, Alison, Serrano, Judah Warren, Abu-Ramadan, Tamara M., Miller, Emily A., McGee, Nancy, Smith, Derek T., Hartung, Cynthia M.·2026·Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

Abstract

= 21) completed a no-drug baseline session and two counterbalanced experimental sessions that involved ingesting a placebo capsule or an amphetamine-dextroamphetamine immediate release 10 mg capsule. For each session, participants completed objective and self-report/subjective neuropsychological measures. Results indicated no significant differences across sessions for self-report/subjective measures and most objective measures. Specifically, for two outcomes on an objective measure (i.e., continuous performance task-identical pairs), performance improved in either the stimulant and placebo conditions compared to baseline or only the placebo condition compared to baseline. Taken together, the results of this study provide further evidence that stimulant medication does not confer neuropsychological improvement in students without ADHD, and perceived improvements may be better attributed to placebo, rather than pharmacological effects of a stimulant medication for this group. This information can inform ongoing efforts to discourage nonmedical prescription stimulant among college students without ADHD. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In a within-subject, double-blind study of 21 college students without ADHD, amphetamine–dextroamphetamine immediate release 10 mg did not improve neuropsychological functioning relative to placebo or baseline on most objective and all self-report/subjective measures. The few objective improvements occurred in placebo or both capsule conditions compared with baseline, suggesting placebo or practice effects rather than stimulant-specific enhancement.

Key findings

  • No significant main effect of time for most objective outcomes: CPT-IP response time variability (F = 0.76, p = 0.47, ηp² = 0.04), CPT-IP omission errors (F = 2.28, p = 0.13, ηp² = 0.10), Spatial Span Forward (F = 0.44, p = 0.64, ηp² = 0.02), and Spatial Span Backward (F = 1.00, p = 0.37, ηp² = 0.05).
  • CPT-IP d-prime showed a significant time effect (F = 11.38, p < 0.01, ηp² = 0.36), with both amphetamine–dextroamphetamine and placebo improved versus baseline and not different from each other; CPT-IP commission errors also showed a time effect (F = 5.51, p = 0.01, ηp² = 0.22), with placebo improved versus baseline. Post hoc analyses controlling for capsule randomization made both effects non-significant (d-prime: F = 0.12, p = 0.89, ηp² = 0.01; commission errors: F = 0.61, p = 0.55, ηp² = 0.03).
  • No significant time effects for self-report/subjective measures: modified DSM-5 ADHD Symptoms Checklist inattention (F = 0.87, p = 0.42, ηp² = 0.04) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (F = 0.01, p = 0.98, ηp² = 0.00), or BDEFS-SF-M total score (F = 1.16, p = 0.31, ηp² = 0.06).
  • Manipulation check showed no significant difference in belief of receiving amphetamine–dextroamphetamine between stimulant (M = 3.52, SD = 1.94) and placebo (M = 2.38, SD = 1.88) sessions (t = 1.76, p = 0.09). Exploratory analyses found no significant biological sex differences on any outcome after Benjamini-Hochberg correction.

Methods

  • Within-subject design: participants (n = 21) completed a no-drug baseline session and two counterbalanced, double-blind experimental sessions involving placebo or amphetamine–dextroamphetamine immediate release 10 mg; cognitive tasks were completed 90 minutes after capsule ingestion.
  • Sample: ages 18–25 (M = 20.48, SD = 1.91), 100% cisgender, 52.4% male, 95.2% non-Hispanic, 90.5% White and 9.5% multiracial; all denied lifetime ADHD diagnosis and reported minimal inattention (M = 1.14, SD = 1.49) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (M = 0.67, SD = 0.91) symptoms.
  • Measures and analysis: objective CPT-IP, Spatial Span Forward/Backward; self-report modified DSM-5 ADHD Symptoms Checklist and modified Barkley Deficits in Executive Functioning Scale–Short Form; one-way repeated measures ANOVAs across baseline, stimulant, and placebo, pairwise comparisons, post hoc analyses controlling capsule randomization, and exploratory independent-samples t-tests with false discovery rate control.

Limitations

  • The paper states that practice effects could explain post-baseline improvements despite post hoc analyses; other objective neuropsychological outcomes were not examined; self-report/subjective measures were completed at least 24 hours after sessions; no ecologically valid academic performance measure was included; only amphetamine–dextroamphetamine IR 10 mg was tested, so results may not apply to other dosages, formulations, or stimulant varieties; meals were not standardized; caffeine was not monitored between sessions; and analyses were powered only for medium or large effects, so small effects may have gone undetected.
  • The paper also notes that an adequate sample of men and women is needed to determine whether biological sex differences exist.
  • Evident from the text: the sample was small (n = 21) and predominantly White, cisgender, and non-Hispanic, which may limit generalizability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pha0000853

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

12 of 33 cited sources checked · 6 supported · 1 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisereasoning

    Only one prior study (Ilieva et al., 2013) included baseline, stimulant, and placebo conditions.

    “Only one study (Ilieva et al., 2013) included baseline, stimulant, and placebo conditions”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ilieva et al., 2013 source

      The Methods (Procedure and materials; page unavailable) describe this paper's study as an online survey of past stimulant use and perceived effects, not a study with baseline, stimulant, and placebo conditions. The Introduction mentions a separate placebo-controlled study by the authors, but our copy does not say that this paper included the three claimed conditions or establish the claim that it was the only such study. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    It is unlikely that minor enhancement effects on objective tasks would translate into improved real-world academic performance.

    “Further, although some studies found small enhancement effects on these tasks for some NPDs (e.g., response time variability measured by a computer task; Weyandt et al. 2018), it is unlikely that such a minor enhancement would translate into improved real-world academic performance (Evans et al., 2021).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Weyandt et al. 2018 source
    • cites Evans et al., 2021 source
  • Premisecitation

    In that prior study, performance was not examined across the three conditions.

    “however, performance was not examined across the three conditions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ilieva et al., 2013 source

      The Methods (Procedure and materials; page unavailable) describe a survey of perceived stimulant effects, and the Discussion explicitly asks how stimulant-enhanced motivation affects actual performance. This supports that the paper did not examine actual performance. It does not describe three conditions in its own study; the Introduction mentions three task/drug conditions only when discussing Volkow et al. (2004). (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    For college students with ADHD who have difficulties with attention and neuropsychological deficits due to dopamine deficits, stimulant medication helps by increasing dopamine to typical levels.

    “For college students with ADHD who have difficulties with attention and neuropsychological deficits (NPDs; e.g., difficulties with EFs) due to dopamine deficits, stimulant medication helps these students by increasing dopamine to typical levels (Arnsten, 2006; Dela Peña et al., 2015; Willcutt, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Arnsten, 2006 source
    • cites Dela Peña et al., 2015 source

      The Introduction (section 2; page unavailable) says psychostimulants, including methylphenidate, increase brain dopamine levels and enhance dopamine transmission. It does not establish that college students with ADHD have dopamine deficits or that stimulant medication raises their dopamine to typical levels and thereby improves attention or executive-function difficulties. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Willcutt, 2015

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Premisecitation

    Existing literature has demonstrated that individuals without ADHD engage in NPS partly due to perceived, non-cognitive enhancements in motivation.

    “Existing literature has demonstrated that individuals without ADHD engage in NPS partly due to perceived, non-cognitive enhancements in motivation (Ilieva & Farah, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ilieva & Farah, 2013 source
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 32
  • May combine two claims. 13
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    Test-retest reliability for Spatial Span total items correct was moderate (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.67) in samples without ADHD.

    “Test-retest reliability for total items correct was moderate (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.67) in samples without ADHD (Woods et al., 2016).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Woods et al., 2016 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Other studies examining the effects of stimulant medication using neuropsychological measures have also used this waiting period length.

    “Other studies examining the effects of stimulant medication using neuropsychological measures have also used this waiting period length (e.g., Batistela et al., 2016).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Batistela et al., 2016 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    NPS is especially prevalent during emerging adulthood, particularly among college students compared to peers who do not attend college.

    “NPS becomes especially prevalent during emerging adulthood, particularly among college students when compared to their peers who do not attend college (McCabe et al., 2018; Schepis et al., 2020).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites McCabe et al., 2018 source
    • cites Schepis et al., 2020

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Similar screening criteria have been used by other studies.

    “Similar screening criteria have been used by other studies (e.g., Ilieva et al., 2013).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ilieva et al., 2013 source
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Six prior studies have largely found no evidence of meaningful neuropsychological improvement in students without ADHD who ingest a stimulant medication, including no improvements for working memory, response inhibition, vigilance, cognitive processing speed, planning, set-shifting, interference control, and distraction suppression.

    “Six studies have largely found no evidence of meaningful neuropsychological improvement in students without ADHD who ingest a stimulant medication.”
    • Also stated in: § Abstract · boosted
      “These studies demonstrated no improvements from stimulant medication for NPDs including working memory, response inhibition, vigilance, cognitive processing speed, planning, set-shifting, interference control, and distraction suppression (Batistela et al., 2016; Bray et al., 2004; Cropsey et al., 2017; Ilieva et al., 2013; Mommaerts et al., 2013; Weyandt et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Batistela et al., 2016 source

      The Discussion reports no effect of methylphenidate on cognitive functioning in this study of healthy young people, and it describes another study with no improvement in attention or working memory. It does not establish the citing sentence’s count of six studies; it also reports improvements in visuo-spatial memory and planning in one prior study. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Bray et al., 2004 source
    • cites Cropsey et al., 2017 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Alternative strategies, such as spaced practice and sufficient sleep, are likely to have a greater impact on academic performance for students.

    “alternative strategies, such as spaced practice and sufficient sleep, are likely to have a greater impact on academic performance for students (e.g., Cepeda et al., 2006, Okano et al, 2019).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Cepeda et al., 2006 source

      The Educational Implications section (p. 14) says spaced learning improves long-term retention compared with concentrating study in one session, including in studies of children. Cepeda et al. do not establish its comparative impact on students’ overall academic performance; sufficient sleep is associated with the other citation, not this one. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Okano et al, 2019 source

      The Discussion reports that longer, better-quality, more consistent sleep was associated with better academic performance. But it says a causal effect requires randomized trials, so the claim that sufficient sleep is likely to have a greater impact is stronger than this study establishes. Spaced practice is attributed to the other citation, not Okano et al. (LLM, conf=0.85)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Participants reported minimal symptoms of HI (M = 0.67; SD = 0.91).

    “HI (M = 0.67; SD = 0.91)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For two outcomes on the Continuous Performance Task - Identical Pairs, performance improved either in both the stimulant and placebo conditions compared to baseline or in the placebo condition compared to baseline.

    “Specifically, for two outcomes on an objective measure (i.e., Continuous Performance Task - Identical Pairs), performance improved in either both the stimulant and placebo conditions compared to baseline or the placebo condition compared to baseline.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Improvement occurred in the placebo or placebo and stimulant medication conditions compared to baseline for two outcomes on an objective task.

    “This occurred for two outcomes on an objective task.”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
      “improvements occurred for 2 of 6 outcomes on objective tasks”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Participants reported consistently receiving adequate sleep on the night before each of the laboratory sessions (M = 6.79 - 7.02).

    “Participants reported consistently receiving adequate sleep on the night before each of the laboratory sessions (M = 6.79 – 7.02).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Scores on the IUQ indicated a minimal likelihood for participants at the present time to misuse a stimulant medication to aid with studying or improving academic performance (M = 1.81; range: 0 - 13 out of 100).

    “Scores on the IUQ indicated a minimal likelihood for participants at the present time to misuse a stimulant medication to aid with studying or improving academic performance (M = 1.81; range: 0 – 13 out of 100)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Scores on the IUQ indicated a minimal likelihood for participants at the present time to misuse a stimulant medication to party or get high (M = 0.19; range: 0 - 1 out of 100).

    “or to party or get high (M = 0.19; range: 0 – 1 out of 100)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Premisereasoning

    Self-report measures that assess behavioral manifestations of NPDs such as time management can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the effects of stimulant medication on NPDs.

    “The use of self-report measures that assess behavioral manifestations of NPDs such as time management can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the effects of stimulant medication on NPDs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    The remaining three of the six prior studies administered 10 mg, 20 mg, or 30 mg of mixed amphetamine salts and used a within-subjects design.

    “The remaining three out of the six studies administered 10 mg, 20 mg, or 30 mg of mixed amphetamine salts (formulations were not described) and used a within-subjects design.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The CPT-IP has demonstrated good test-retest reliability for d-prime (r = 0.81) and acceptable test-retest reliability for mean reaction time (r = 0.74) in samples without ADHD.

    “The CPT-IP has demonstrated good test-retest reliability for d-prime (r = 0.81) and acceptable test-retest reliability for mean reaction time (r = 0.74) in samples without ADHD (Hahn et al., 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hahn et al., 2014

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    This study was preregistered.

    “This study was preregistered; see https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03935646.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Categorization as low risk was monitored and verified throughout the study.

    “Categorization as low risk was monitored and verified throughout the study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The two experimental sessions were double-blinded and counterbalanced.

    “The two experimental sessions were double-blinded and counterbalanced.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    There is a firmly held belief that stimulant medication improves executive functions and academic skills while decreasing distractibility, restlessness, fatigue, and sleepiness.

    “There is a firmly held belief that stimulant medication improves executive functions (EFs; e.g., sustained attention, working memory) and academic skills (e.g., reading comprehension, productivity) while decreasing distractibility, restlessness, fatigue, and sleepiness (Benson et al., 2015; DeSantis et al., 2008; Hartung et al., 2013; Rabiner et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Benson et al., 2015 source
    • cites DeSantis et al., 2008 source
    • cites Hartung et al., 2013 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Participants who completed all study sessions were included in analyses.

    “Participants who completed all study sessions were included in analyses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    College students without ADHD are likely to experience little to no benefit from taking stimulant medication because there is no dopamine deficit to correct.

    “College students without ADHD, however, are likely to experience little to no benefit from taking stimulant medication because there is no dopamine deficit to correct (e.g., Cropsey et al., 2017).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cropsey et al., 2017 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Adequate sample size was determined using a power analysis.

    “Adequate sample size was determined using a power analysis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The Benjamini-Hochberg procedure was used to control for the false discovery rate in exploratory analyses.

    “The Benjamini-Hochberg (BH) procedure was used to control for the false discovery rate.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Self-report measures of behavioral manifestations of NPDs are more ecologically valid and may provide a convincing argument to students that NPS does not improve NPDs most relevant to behavioral changes that could result in academic enhancement.

    “Additionally, these types of measures are more ecologically valid and may provide a convincing argument to students that NPS does not improve NPDs most relevant to behavioral changes that could result in academic enhancement.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    There were no adverse reactions to any administered capsules and no unexpected in-lab emergencies.

    “There were no adverse reactions to any administered capsules and no unexpected in-lab emergencies.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The final sample of 21 had high power (1 - β = 0.88) to detect a medium effect (f = 0.25) and high power (1 - β = 0.99) to detect a large effect (f = 0.40).

    “The final sample of 21 had high power (1 - β = 0.88) to detect a medium effect (f = 0.25) and high power (1- β = 0.99) to detect a large effect (f = 0.40).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Faul et al., 2007

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    The CONSORT reporting guidelines were used to present data from this study.

    “The CONSORT reporting guidelines (Schulz et al. 2010) were used to present data from this study (see Figure 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schulz et al. 2010

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Other studies have observed self-reported EF changes resulting from stimulant medication use among college students with ADHD.

    “Although no studies have used the BDEFS-SF-M, other studies (e.g., DuPaul et al., 2012) have observed self-reported EF changes resulting from stimulant medication use among college students with ADHD.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites DuPaul et al., 2012 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Participants categorized as low risk for amphetamine-dextroamphetamine use were included in the study.

    “Participants categorized as low risk for amphetamine–dextroamphetamine use were included in the study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    Across these three within-subjects studies, participants held positive beliefs about receiving stimulant medication.

    “Across these three studies, participants held positive beliefs about receiving stimulant medication.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Both types of capsules were visibly indistinguishable.

    “Both types of capsules were visibly indistinguishable.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    For the current study, internal consistency was good for the IA subscale (α = 0.85) and questionable for the HI subscale (α = 0.67) on the DSM-5 ADHD Symptoms Checklist.

    “For the current study, internal consistency was good for the IA subscale (α = 0.85) and questionable for the HI subscale (α = 0.67).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Consumption of caffeine was not monitored between sessions, although participants abstained from caffeine for at least 12 hours prior to each session.

    “Consumption of caffeine (e.g., coffee, tea) was not monitored between sessions, although participants abstained from caffeine for at least 12 hours prior to each session.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    College students have particularly strong beliefs about neuropsychological enhancement from NPS, especially in improving academic performance.

    “College students have particularly strong beliefs about neuropsychological enhancement from NPS, especially in improving academic performance (e.g., Benson et al., 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Benson et al., 2015 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Post-baseline improvements for some outcomes may also be due to increases in motivation from receiving a capsule.

    “Post-baseline improvements for some outcomes may also be due to increases in motivation from receiving a capsule.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationnone given

    There are other factors unrelated to the study that may have influenced how participants responded to self-report/subjective measures completed at least 24 hours after the start of sessions.

    “there are other factors unrelated to the study that may have influenced how participants responded”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Because only amphetamine-dextroamphetamine IR 10 mg was administered, results do not necessarily apply to other dosages, formulations (i.e., extended-release), or varieties of stimulant medication, or account for individual variations of usage or side effects.

    “Because only amphetamine–dextroamphetamine IR 10 mg was administered in the current study, results do not necessarily apply to other dosages, formulations (i.e., extended-release), or varieties of stimulant medication, or account for individual variations of usage (e.g., taking multiple doses in a 24-hour period) or side effects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Meals prior to each session were not standardized, potentially varying the rate and extent of stimulant absorption.

    “Meals prior to each session were not standardized, potentially varying the rate and extent of stimulant absorption.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
38 of 38
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    College students cite cognitive enhancement, specifically academic improvement, as the most common reason for NPS.

    “College students cite cognitive enhancement, specifically academic improvement, as the most common reason for NPS.”
1 of 1

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Discussion claims improvement beyond order effects despite nonsignificant adjusted results

    Major

    The discussion says the post hoc analyses showed improvement over time beyond order effects. The reported main effects of time were no longer significant after controlling for capsule randomization (p = 0.89 and p = 0.55), so those analyses do not support that claim.

1 of 1

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Barkley RA (2011). Barkley Adult ADHD Rating Scale-IV (BAARS-IV). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  2. Preuss CV, Kalava A, & King KC (2024). Prescription of Controlled Substances: Benefits and Risks. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537318/
  3. Willcutt EG (2015). Theories of ADHD. In Barkley RA (Ed.), Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment (4th ed., pp. 391– 404). The Guilford Press.

Authors
Vasko, J. M., Looby, A., Serrano, J. W., Abu-Ramadan, T. M., Miller, E. A., McGee, N., Smith, D. T., & Hartung, C. M.
Affiliations
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
  • University of Wyoming (US)
  • University of Denver (US)
  • Children's National (US)
Venue
Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
Published
2026-08
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
426-434
ISSN
  • 1064-1297 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-2293
OpenAlex
W7160869862
Cited by
0
References
0
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (2P20GM103432)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
stimulant medication, placebo effect, university students, neuropsychological performance, continuous performance test
MeSH terms
Cognitive Enhancement, Adolescent, Adult, Central Nervous System Stimulants, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Dextroamphetamine, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Students, Universities, Young Adult, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-16.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-16.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review